Practice Summary

Sasha Blackmore was called to the Bar in 2005 and specialises in public, planning, environmental, EU and information rights law. She has appeared at all levels up to the Supreme Court and has extensive experience of judicial review proceedings, statutory appeals and planning inquiries. Sasha appears regularly in the Administrative Court and the Planning Court; she had conduct of well over 100 oral permission hearings in 2015-2016. She is recommended as a leading junior by the Legal 500 2016 for Administrative & Public law, which states that “she has an excellent manner with clients that gives them confidence”.

Sasha has a particular interest in environmental-related matters in public and planning law, and spent time on a Pegasus scholarship in Australia and New Zealand examining their system of environmental and planning courts. Sasha has also been a Trustee and Director of Forum for the Future and has been a Trustee and Director of the United Kingdom Environmental Law Association as a member of the Governing Council.

In September 2016, Sasha was appointed to the Attorney-General’s “B” Panel of Junior Counsel. She is also one of a small number of barristers appointed to the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s Panel Counsel in 2015.

Environment

In the environmental field, Sasha undertakes a range of environmental litigation and advisory work in the domestic and EU law spheres. She has particular experience of issues relating to marine licences, access to environmental information and the Aarhus Convention. Her experience includes environmental impact assessment, strategic environmental assessment, climate change, many aspects of energy projects renewables, pollution prevention and control, waste, and criminal prosecutions under the Environmental Protection Act for the Environment Agency and the Town and Country Planning Act for local authorities. Her clients include local authorities, major companies, individuals and NGOs, as well as the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the Marine Management Organisation, the Department for the Environment (Northern Ireland) and Natural Resources Wales. She has appeared both in her own right on a large number of cases and inquiries and has also been lead in major applications and appeals. In environmental-related planning matters, Sasha undertakes a wide range of advisory and inquiry work. Her experience includes advertising, housing development, planning appeals including on conservation and wildlife, EIA/SEA, listed building and design grounds, as well as on village greens, compulsory purchase and gypsy appeals.

Sasha has a strong personal interest in environmental-related matters in public and planning law, and spent time on a Pegasus scholarship in Australia and New Zealand examining their system of environmental and planning courts. She has a masters’ degree in sustainable development, and was also until recently a Trustee and Director of Forum for the Future and a Trustee and Director of the United Kingdom Environmental Law Association as a member of the Governing Council.

Major recent reported cases include:

Greenpeace v DEFRA and the MMO [2016] EWHC 55 (Admin); important challenge brought by Greenpeace to the Secretary of State’s allocation of fishing rights under the EU Common Fisheries Policy.

Johnson v SSEFRA[2015] UKUT 0207 (AAC) and NVZ/2012/032; the only Nitrates appeal to have been determined by the Upper Tribunal.

Powell v Brighton Marina and the MMO [2015] EWCA Civ 650; [2015] JPL 1301. This is a challenge to the MMO’s decision to grant a marine licence for a high-profile redevelopment scheme on the Brighton Marina front. The claim was dismissed by the Court of Appeal and permission was refused by the Supreme Court. A third judicial review claim by the same applicant is currently (2016) seeking permission from the High Court.

C-71/14 East Sussex Council Sasha acted for Central Government, led by James Maurici QC in these important cases about access to environmental information in property search charging. The multi-million pound claims, including other domestic claims, relate to access to free environmental information in property searches.

Other recent (2015-2016) advisory work and other reported cases include:

Advising on high profile fisheries disputes, including between the States of Guernsey and the Secretary of State for the Environment and the Marine Management Organisation; and for the Department of Transport in relation to licences of individual vessels (both currently on-going).

Advising on a variety of matters connected with marine licensing, including advising on aspects of a marine DCO, and other marine challenges including as to the scope of marine EIAs and the impacts on protected marine species of marine activities (2015-2016). Sasha is currently instructed on two environmental/marine judicial reviews by the Marine Management Organisation.

Advising on waste and energy matters, where Sasha has a particular environmental interest, including advising the Department of the Environment in relation to windfarm development in active peat. Sasha also appeared in Britaniacrest Recycling Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government (2015). Sasha has appeared for statutory objectors at wind farm inquiries (2014), and has appeared at waste inquiries for local councils and also for objectors, including instructions from leading NGOs such as Biofuelwatch and Friends of the Earth. Sasha was also instructed in Bowen-West v SSCLG(see below), a case which sought permission from the Supreme Court as to the deposit of low level nuclear waste in a hazardous landfill site.

Advising on EIA matters in major planning applications and on appeal, including as to the scope of retrospective EIAs in major applications (2015-2016).

Advising on protected species matters in housebuilding applications and on appeal, including as to appropriate mitigation (2015-2016). Sasha has appeared for and against developers seeking planning permission for housing developments at both public inquiries and in the High Court, particularly in Greenbelt sites or AONB or other sensitive sites in habitats areas or woodland. Sasha recently appeared for the Secretary of State in John Turner v (1) Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government (2) East Dorset District Council [2015] EWHC 2728 (Admin) a challenge to a housing development in the Greenbelt which concerned the proper interpretation of paragraph 89 NPPF. She also appeared in R (CPRE) v University of Oxford and Oxford City Council ( 2014), a high-profile case involving Oxford University’s development of student housing adjacent to Port Meadow, led by Rupert Warren QC, which has been on-going throughout 2015-2016.

Sasha is experienced in waste PFI matters. She appeared in R (on the Application of Cheshire East Borough Council and others v Secretary of State for Environment Food and Rural Affairs [2011] EWHC 1975 (Admin) (led by James Maurici QC), as to the scope of the Secretary of State’s power to remove funding from major projects; Sasha was re-instructed by DEFRA in 2014 in two further unsuccessful similar multi-million pound challenge to the scope of the Secretary of State’s decision-making in 2014 R (Bradford & Calderdale Council) v Secretary of State for Environment Food and Rural Affairs and R (North Yorkshire County Council) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

Sasha has advised on the protection of ancient woodland, as well as in relation to the protection of specific species, in the context of major development.

Advising and acting in claims for injunctive relief and associated committal proceedings in environmental (planning enforcement) and gypsy matters (2009-2010), including obtaining a suspended prison sentence order which finally enabled a Council to enforce clearance of a site of tens of thousands of tonnes of waste where enforcement action had been ongoing for over a decade (2010). Sasha acted in 2015 in Reilly v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Councilwhere the High Court upheld a planning inspector’s decision to refuse consent for development of a caravan site adjacent to a main road where two individuals were killed because of poor visibility at the junction despite DMRB standards being met.

Sasha advised in 2016 as to whether to adjourn civil environmental appeal for the determination of criminal matters. Sasha’s experience prior to 2015 also includes prosecuting for breaches of environmental legislation for the Environment Agency and for various local councils in relation to enforcement notices and stop notices, as well as defending private clients for breach of enforcement notices and other local authority matters in London and the South-East. She has appeared in courts in Brent, Didcot, Hackney, Horsham, Uxbridge, Wandsworth, and Waltham Forest.

Sasha advises on highways law. She has been instructed on a number of highways cases, including for the Highways Agency on a major road scheme (led by John Litton QC) and also independently. She has also appeared for local Councils (both in relation to impact on the local road networks from house building and in relation to certification under s.17 of the Land Compensation Act) and advises regularly on matters relating to the road network including impacts, adoption of roads as public roads, and permitted development rights on highways.

Older important EIA caselaw. Sasha advised in Bowen-West v SSCLG and others [2012] EWCA Civ 321, permission was refused by the Supreme Court against the Court of Appeal decision. Important case as to the proper scope of the EIA Directive as to what is a “project” and the approach to cumulative, secondary and indirect effects (led by Richard Drabble QC). She also appeared in R (on the application of Bateman) v (1) South Cambridgeshire District Council and (2) Camgrain Storage Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 157 (Mummery, Moore-Bick and Jackson L.JJ) At first instance: ([2010] EWHC 797 (Admin) – an important EIA case which was successful in the Court of Appeal (led by Richard Drabble QC). Sasha also advised in R (on the application of Carroll) v Westminster City Council [2010] EWHC 2019 (Admin), a challenge to the Mayor’s cycle scheme, which had not carried out an EIA.

Older climate change and air quality law. Sasha advised and appeared in R (on the application of Griffin) – v – (1) London Borough of Newham and (2) London City Airport Limited [2011] EWHC 53 (Admin) (Pill LJ, Roderick Evans J) Acted for local residents, led by Nathalie Lieven QC and instructed by Friends of the Earth Rights & Justice Centre, in a challenge to the doubling of capacity at London City Airport on consultation and climate change grounds.

Milebush Properties Ltd – v – (1) Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council and (2) the Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Hillingdon [2010] EWHC 1022 (Ch) (before Arnold J) appealed to the Court of Appeal in Milebush Properties Ltd v Tameside Metropolitan BC [2011] EWCA Civ 270 (Mummery, Moore-Bick and Jackson L.JJ.) Acted for the local planning authority in an important case as to the scope of declaratory relief in s.106 agreements. The local planning authority were awarded indemnity costs in the High Court.

Sasha spent her first year of tenancy as a Judicial Assistant to the Law Lords (Lord Scott of Foscote, Baroness Hale of Richmond and Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury), working on cases before both the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords and the Privy Council. She gained substantial experience of appellate advocacy and judicial practice during that year. Cases she worked on in the House of Lords as a judicial assistant with a strong environmental or planning focus included R (on the application of National Grid Gas plc (formerly Transco plc)) v. Environment [2007] UKHL 30, R v. London Borough of Bromley, ex parte Barker, [2006] UKHL 52 and Belfast City Council v Miss Behavin Limited [2007] UKHL 19.

Planning

Sasha advises on all aspects of planning and compulsory purchase law and appears regularly in the High Court, Court of Appeal and inquiries and hearings.

Over the past 5 years, Sasha has developed particular expertise in housing cases particularly High Court challenges and advising on matters relating to a five year housing land supply. She was instructed in one of the first cases to have considered the operation of s.106B of the TCPA 1990. Sasha also has a range of experience in enforcement cases, ranging from enforcement inquiries to obtaining a committal order. Her clients include major institutions, local authorities, central Government, major housebuilders, and small and large NGOs.

Sasha also has a marine practice in planning law, having advised on marine aspects of DCOs, and acts regularly for the MMO in relation to marine licences for planning developments (and other development).

Sasha frequently advises local authorities on planning law claims which have been issued against them. She gives practical advice as to the prospects of success, recognising when a case should be robustly defended and where it is in a council’s best interests to concede swiftly or reach other appropriate settlement, limiting costs. In 2015-2016 for example a number of cases have been conceded on her advice at an early stage with no order for costs against the Local Authority concerned, and other cases potential Claimants have not issued claims on receipt of the Defendant’s response to the pre-action protocol letter before claim. Local authorities Sasha has advised since 2015 include Bath and North East Somerset, St Albans, Southwark, Camden, Stroud, Tower Hamlets, Hackney and Maldon.

Recent/ongoing High Court challenges and advisory work (2015-2016) includes:

Sasha advises on a wide range of planning matters. Advisory work in 2015-2016 includes:

Advising on basement construction and the new GPDO;

Advising on housing land supply issues for local authorities including in relation to the cross-boundary provision and the duty to co-operate;

Advising local authorities on their five year housing land supply issue and other strategic matters relating to housing generally, in the context of specific appeals to the Inspectorate, and in the High Court;

Advising on Assets of Community Value and associated planning implications, including on specific challenges in the High Court;

Advising local groups on resisting the expansion of Government infrastructure projects in the Greenbelt (which led to the relevant project being withdrawn;

Advising a number of Parish Councils and individuals on matters relating to Neighbourhood Plans, including by way of judicial review challenge

Viability advice on housing schemes;

Urgent Article 4 directions;

Advising on specific aspects of the new GPDO;

Primary school expansions;

Implementations of complex planning permissions;

EIA assessments, including retrospective EIA assessment of major development;

Advising major and minor developers on aspects of housebuilding;

Advising on Listed Buildings matters in the context of both planning applications and judicial review / statutory challenges;

Waste and energy matters; see environmental practice.

Older cases and advisory work (prior to 2015) include:

Sasha has appeared for and against developers seeking planning permission for housing developments and advised on related housing aspects, including at both public inquiries and in the High Court. In addition to those 2015-2016 cases listed above, she also appeared in older cases interpreting the NPPF and the relevance of settlements lines, e.g. Langton Homes Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2014] EWHC 487 (Admin), which is an issue which regularly comes up in her planning practice. She has been advising Oxford University into a major scheme (led by Rupert Warren) (2015-2016). She has appeared at inquiries and advised on housing developments impacting on protected habitats areas, where she has a particular interest, and sensitive woodland sites. She was led by Christopher Lockhart-Mummery QC in CPRE (Wiltshire Branch) v Swindon Borough Council (acting for the developer) (permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal refused in 2010).

Sasha has advised on the protection of ancient woodland, as well as in relation to the protection of specific species, in the context of major development (for both developers and local authorities). Species Sasha has advised in relation to planning issues include Great Crested Newts, Bats, Dormice, and nesting birds. She also has experience of “green bridges” and green walls.

Sasha advises on highways law. She has been instructed on a number of highways cases, including for the Highways Agency on a major road scheme (led by John Litton QC) and also independently. She has also appeared for local Councils (both in relation to impact on the local road networks from house building and in relation to certification under s.17 of the Land Compensation Act) and advises regularly on matters relating to the road network including impacts, adoption of roads as public roads, and permitted development rights on highways.

Advising and acting in claims for injunctive relief and associated committal proceedings in environmental (planning enforcement) and gypsy matters (2009-2010), including obtaining a suspended prison sentence order which finally enabled a Council to enforce clearance of a site of tens of thousands of tonnes of waste where enforcement action had been ongoing for over a decade (2010). Sasha acted in 2015 in Reilly v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council where the High Court upheld a planning inspector’s decision to refuse consent for development of a caravan site adjacent to a main road where two individuals were killed because of poor visibility at the junction despite DMRB standards being met.

Older important EIA caselaw. Sasha advised in Bowen-West v SSCLG and others [2012] EWCA Civ 321, permission was refused by the Supreme Court against the Court of Appeal decision. Important case as to the proper scope of the EIA Directive as to what is a “project” and the approach to cumulative, secondary and indirect effects (led by Richard Drabble QC). She also appeared in R (on the application of Bateman) v (1) South Cambridgeshire District Council and (2) Camgrain Storage Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 157 (Mummery, Moore-Bick and Jackson L.JJ) At first instance: ([2010] EWHC 797 (Admin) – an important EIA case which was successful in the Court of Appeal (led by Richard Drabble QC). Sasha also advised in R (on the application of Carroll) v Westminster City Council [2010] EWHC 2019 (Admin), a challenge to the Mayor’s cycle scheme, which had not carried out an EIA.

Older climate change and air quality law. Sasha advised and appeared in R (on the application of Griffin) – v – (1) London Borough of Newham and (2) London City Airport Limited [2011] EWHC 53 (Admin) (Pill LJ, Roderick Evans J) Acted for local residents, led by Nathalie Lieven QC and instructed by Friends of the Earth Rights & Justice Centre, in a challenge to the doubling of capacity at London City Airport on consultation and climate change grounds.

Older s.106 agreement caselaw. Milebush Properties Ltd – v – (1) Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council and (2) the Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Hillingdon [2010] EWHC 1022 (Ch) (before Arnold J) appealed to the Court of Appeal in Milebush Properties Ltd v Tameside Metropolitan BC [2011] EWCA Civ 270 (Mummery, Moore-Bick and Jackson L.JJ.) Sasha acted for the local planning authority in an important case as to the scope of declaratory relief in s.106 agreements, and was also successful in achieving indemnity costs for the local planning authority.

Sasha has also appeared in a variety of small and medium-sized householder appeals in relation to the construction of new dwellings and replacement dwellings in the countryside for both local planning authorities, and individuals, 2010-2015, and enforcement notice matters. Various smaller (1-2 day) public inquiries defending the refusal of permission and/or issues of Enforcement Notices, particularly in relation to impact on AONBs, Green Belts, householder extensions, agricultural uses (including for agricultural dwellings, alpacas and poultry farming) and Listed Buildings, as well as on impacts of the Birds Directive.

Prosecuting for various local councils in relation to enforcement notices and stop notices and defending private clients for breach of enforcement notices. Sasha’s current enforcement practice is predominantly in the High Court, but Sasha has appeared in courts throughout London and the South-East, including at committal proceedings. In the past few years she has appeared in courts in Brent, Didcot, Hackney, Horsham, Uxbridge, Wandsworth, and Waltham Forest.

Sasha has an expertise in playing fields in two different planning appeals (successfully defended).

Sasha spent her first year of tenancy as a Judicial Assistant to the Law Lords (Lord Scott of Foscote, Baroness Hale of Richmond and Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury), working on cases before both the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords and the Privy Council. She gained substantial experience of appellate advocacy and judicial practice during that year. Cases she worked on in the House of Lords as a judicial assistant included, R v. London Borough of Bromley, ex parte Barker, [2006] UKHL 52 and Belfast City Council v Miss Behavin Limited [2007] UKHL 19.

Public and Human Rights Law

Sasha undertakes a variety of public law work which is at the heart of her practice, including central and local government, freedom of information, immigration, education, mental health, social security, prisons, transport as well as planning and environmentally-related public law. She has a long-standing interest in environmental and planning law, and her judicial review practice extends broadly to issues arising in social security law, equality and discrimination law (she is on the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s Panel of Counsel).

Sasha has appeared before all levels of Appellate Court and regularly appears in the High Court in judicial review and statutory planning appeal matters, in her own right and when being led by senior counsel. Her clients include government, individuals, property developers, local authorities and NGOs. As well as her long-standing interest in environmental and planning law in this area, she also has a keen interest in education, immigration and social security/welfare rights law and has recently appeared in the Supreme Court in relation to Child Tax Credits. She has experience of all types of school appeals and has been involved in immigration appeals to the courts and a variety of First Tier and Upper Tribunal work (for both Claimants/Appellants and for the Secretary of State). She also undertakes rating work.

Recent cases of note include:

Greenpeace v DEFRA and the MMO [2016] EWHC 55 (Admin). an important challenge brought by Greenpeace to the Secretary of State’s allocation of fishing rights under the EU Common Fisheries Policy).

Dunnett v SSCLG[2016] EWHC 534 (Admin), an important case on the interpretation of planning conditions post the obiter comments by the Supreme Court in Trump v The Scottish Ministers[2015] UKSC 74.

Johnson v SSEFRA[2015] UKUT 0207 (AAC) and NVZ/2012/032; the only Nitrates appeal to have been determined by the Upper Tribunal.

Kuteh v Secretary of State for Education [2014] EWCA Civ 1586 (and successfully defending the Secretary of State’s safeguarding decision subsequently in the First Tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal in 2015 and 2016); an important case in the Court of Appeal on the Upper Tribunal’s discretion to depart from the High Court’s findings on an error of law.

C-71/14 East Sussex CouncilSasha acted for Central Government, led by James Maurici QC in these important cases about access to environmental information in property search charging. The multi-million pound claims, including other domestic claims, relate to access to free environmental information in property searches.

Legal 500 recommends Sasha as a leading junior in public and administrative law (“Enjoys a growing reputation in public law.”).

Immigration

Sasha is highly experienced in judicial review challenges to a variety of immigration matters. The majority of Sasha’s immigration practice is for the Secretary of State, but she also accepts instructions for both individuals/businesses. She is currently appearing in the Court of Appeal Italy returns litigation, led by Lisa Giovannetti QC. She appears in over a hundred oral permission hearings a year in both the High Court/Upper Tribunal and the Court of Appeal. She has significant experience in revocation of sponsorship licences, unlawful detention, fresh claims, Article 8 challenges, point based system challenges and “Third Country” removals (usually Article 2/3 based) and Gurka claims, as well as claims to entitlement to British citizenship.

Recent reported cases of note include:

MS, NA, SG v SSHD [2015] EWHC 1095 (Admin) – the latest “Italy returns” case under Dublin II which will be heard by the Court of Appeal in late summer. Sasha is instructed in a number of other Italy cases which are at either pre-permission or substantive stage in the Court of Appeal, High Court and Upper Tribunal.

Licence revocation cases. Sasha has appeared for the Secretary of State in about a dozen challenges to revocation or suspension of sponsor licences, including the often reported R (on the application of Westech College) – v – the Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWHC 1484 (Admin) (Silber J.). Sasha is currently instructed in two different substantive licence challenge cases for the Secretary of State.

A significant number of unlawful detention cases, including recently in 2016 Ibrahim v SSHD [2016] EWHC 158 (Admin). Sasha is currently instructed in four other substantive unlawful detention challenges (many of which settle on agreed terms).

Other public law, including social security and education and care standards law, ratings and other public law

Sasha appears regularly for a variety of claimants and defendants in other public law matters. Her clients include individuals, small or larger local groups, Parish Councils, local government, central government, the police, companies and devolved administrations or non-departmental public bodies.

Her experience in planning and environmental-related public law work is summarised above, and also includes advisory work on assets of community value (including judicial review proceedings). This also includes information-rights based work, and Sasha has advised on both appeals to the Information Commissioner and appeals under the DPA as well as access to information under the Environmental Information Regulations.

Sasha has a particular interest in equality and the protection of the vulnerable, particularly cases impacting on women and the regulation of when professionals are able to work with children or vulnerable adults. She appears regularly for the Department of Work and Pensions in the Upper Tribunal on social security and child benefit matters, and also accepts instructions from individuals (often on a pro-bono basis) in the same area. Sasha acts regularly for the Department of Work and Pensions and also does a number of pro-bono cases a year for individual claimants.

Recent reported cases of interest in this area include Kuteh v Secretary of State for Education [2014] EWCA Civ 1586 (and successfully defending the decision in the Care Standards Tribunal in 2015 and Upper Tribunal in 2016) and a range of cases for the DWP in the Upper Tribunal, including Pirroni v DWP CE/2966/2014and Taylor and Coombs v SSWP (RNIB intervening) (judgment awaited) and cases involving child support. She also appeared for Mr Humphreys in Humphreys v HMRC[2012] UKSC 18 in the Supreme Court (led by Richard Drabble QC) as to the apportionment of Child Tax Credit for substantial minority carers on subsistence benefits on the basis of discrimination between men and women. Sasha sat on the Neuberger Entry to the Bar Working Party group, set up to try to improve access to the Bar, and is one of small number of barristers appointed to the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s Panel Counsel in 2015

Sasha has acted in a variety of prison law cases, for the Parole Board, and for the Police, including recent High Court challenges to a prison adjudicator’s decision about the meaning of a “fight in prison, the scope of the MoJ’s discretion to release on licence, and challenges to the police’s discretion in relation to maintaining data on its database and issuing harassment notices.

Sasha spent her first year of tenancy as a Judicial Assistant to the Law Lords (Lord Scott of Foscote, Baroness Hale of Richmond and Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury), working on cases before both the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords and the Privy Council. She gained substantial experience of appellate advocacy and judicial practice during that year. Unsurprisingly Sasha worked on an extremely large range of public law cases in her year as Judicial Assistant. These included Al-Skeini and others v Secretary of State for Defence [2007] UKHL 26, YL (by her litigation friend the Official Solicitor) v. Birmingham City Council [2007] UKHL 27, Secretary of State for the Home Dept. v JJ and Others [2007] UKHL 45, R (on the application of Laporte) v. Chief Constable of Gloucestershire [2006] UKHL 55 and Huang and Kashmiri v Secretary of State, [2007] UKHL 11.

Other Qualifications

Forum for the Future/Middlesex University. MProf in Sustainable Development (2001)

Recommendations

‘She has a wide-ranging public law practice and is thorough and thoughtful.’ Legal 500, 2019 – Administrative & Public Law

“Superb all-rounder and excellent on her feet. Sasha is a case winner and a rising star in the Planning and Environment Bar.” “Impressive advocate. She did a very good job with a difficult case.” Chambers & Partners, 2018 – Planning

“She’s very bright and has a sound grasp of the finer detail.” Legal 500, 2017 – Administrative & Public Law

Landmark Chambers has updated its cookie policy. We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. This includes cookies from third party social media website if you visit a page which contains embedded content from social media. Such third party cookies may track your use of Landmark’s website. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on the Landmark website. However, you can change your cookie settings at any time Find out more